J. Letitia Grenier | USGS Science

USGS2024

Managed wetlands for climate action: Potential greenhouse gas and subsidence mitigation in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta

In the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta (Delta), widespread drainage of historical wetlands has led to extensive subsidence and peat carbon losses, as well as high ongoing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Large-scale wetland restoration and conversion to rice fields has the potential to mitigate these effects while conferring flood protection and creating habitat for wetland species. To explore the scale of these potential benefits, this study evaluated the effects of seven Delta-wide land-use scenarios on carbon stocks, land-surface elevation, GHG emissions, and habitat. Peat mapping and data from peat cores indicate that soil carbon stocks have decreased between the early 1800s and 2010s from 288 ± 15 to 145 ± 14 million metric tons (Mt) of carbon (C). If existing land uses continue, the Delta could lose an additional 8.3 Mt C during the coming 40 years, equal to average GHG emissions of 1.2 Mt CO2 equivalents (CO2e) yr-1. Future restoration and rice-farming scenarios indicate that wetland restoration could theoretically halt GHG emissions, converting the Delta from a large GHG source to a weak net source or sink. Across three future scenarios based on existing restoration targets, wetland creation and conversion to rice fields reduced GHG emissions by 0.39 to 0.67 Mt CO2e yr-1, with per-area benefits of 16 to 28 t CO2e per hectare (ha) yr-1. Differences among scenarios in extents of wetland types influenced their relative benefits for different management goals. Tidal restoration and conversion to rice fields enhanced habitat benefits and offered a source of agricultural income, but with reduced GHG mitigation compared with conversion to peat-building wetlands. This highlights the importance of clear objectives when developing land-use plans. A strategic land-management portfolio that includes rice fields and both impounded and tidal wetlands could be designed to provide GHG and subsidence mitigation while offering a diverse suite of benefits for ecosystems and people.

California↗

USGS2021

On the human appropriation of wetland primary production

Humans are changing the Earth's surface at an accelerating pace, with significant consequences for ecosystems and their biodiversity. Landscape transformation has far-reaching implications including reduced net primary production (NPP) available to support ecosystems, reduced energy supplies to consumers, and disruption of ecosystem services such as carbon storage. Anthropogenic activities have reduced global NPP available to terrestrial ecosystems by nearly 25%, but the loss of NPP from wetland ecosystems is unknown. We used a simple approach to estimate aquatic NPP from measured habitat areas and habitat-specific areal productivity in the largest wetland complex on the USA west coast, comparing historical and modern landscapes and a scenario of wetland restoration. Results show that a 77% loss of wetland habitats (primarily marshes) has reduced ecosystem NPP by 94%, C (energy) flow to herbivores by 89%, and detritus production by 94%. Our results also show that attainment of habitat restoration goals could recover 12% of lost NPP and measurably increase carbon flow to consumers, including at-risk species and their food resources. This case study illustrates how a simple approach for quantifying the loss of NPP from measured habitat losses can guide wetland conservation plans by establishing historical baselines, projecting functional outcomes of different restoration scenarios, and establishing performance metrics to gauge success.

California↗

USGS2018

Sediment supply to San Francisco Bay, water years 1995 through 2016: Data, trends, and monitoring recommendations to support decisions about water quality, tidal wetlands, and resilience to sea level rise

Knowledge of the status and trends of sediment supply to San Francisco Bay is critically important for management decisions about dredging, marsh restoration, flood control, contaminants, water clarity (in relation to primary production), and sea level rise. Several sitespecific studies of sediment supply to San Francisco Bay have been conducted, but no synthesis of recent studies is available. The purpose of this report is to synthesize the best available data and knowledge to answer a few of the key study questions related to sediment supply to the Bay (listed below). This synthesis report was prepared jointly by the Regional Monitoring Program for Water Quality in San Francisco Bay (RMP) and the U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) with funding from both organizations. The project is meant to be a step in the development of a more comprehensive sediment management and monitoring strategy for the Bay. What are the magnitudes and sources of fine and coarse sediment transported to San Francisco Bay? Net sediment supply to San Francisco Bay from terrestrial sources during the most recent 22- year period (water years [WY] 1995-2016) was 1.9+/-0.8 Mt/yr (1 Mt is one million metric tonnes or 1 billion kilograms). Sixty-three percent of the sediment supply was from small tributaries that drain directly to the Bay. Net supply from the Central Valley (measured at Mallard Island) was 37% of the total supply. Bedload supply, after accounting for dredging, removals, storage in flood control channels, and errors in measurements was indistinguishable from zero. For a 30-year “climate normal” reference period of WY 1981-2010 (a period assumed to be representative of current climatic conditions), we estimate the total sediment supply would be 2.0 Mt/yr of which 70% would come from small tributaries. The delivery points are Mallard Island for sediment from the Delta and the head of tide of each small tributary or outfall for sediment from the small tributaries. The finding that, on average, small tributaries have supplied more sediment to the Bay than the Delta is important but not new (McKee et al., 2013). During the Gold Rush and perhaps through to the 1980s, 80% or more of the supply was estimated to be from the Central Valley (Porterfield, 1980). But land and water management have continued to evolve (Krone, 1996) and the sediment wave associated with the Gold Rush has diminished (Schoellhamer, 2011). In addition, the coastal mountains of California and around the Bay are steep, tectonically active and composed of relatively erodible marine sedimentary and metasedimentary rocks, in contrast to the Central Valley watershed that is dominated by highly indurated granitic, metasedimentary, and metavolcanic rocks in the western-facing slopes of the Sierra Nevada Mountains (McKee et al., 2013). Also, water management is quite different between the Central Valley rivers and small tributaries. About 48% of the Central Valley watershed is upstream from dams that are designed to capture, delay and diminish discharge from spring snowmelt and so eliminate or damp many of the peak flows that are normally crucial for sediment transport. Another factor contributing to the importance of small tributaries for sediment supply is the way that they deliver sediment. Annual discharge from small tributaries is very small in comparison to the volume of the Bay (around one-fifth of a Bay volume on average), and the load that small tributaries supply is delivered through hundreds of channels and outfalls via wetland sloughs to the mudflats on the margin of the Bay. Therefore, the majority of this sediment delivered from Bay Area small tributaries is more likely to be trapped in these tidal channels or the margins of the Bay. In contrast, supply from the Central Valley enters the Bay through one large river channel at the head of the estuary (functionally adjacent to Mallard Island, near Pittsburg, CA) with an average annual discharge volume that is more than twi

California↗